GSA awards $6.28M contract for MOAKLEY HARDENING design services to Jacobs Engineering Group Inc

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $627,839 ($627.8K)

Contractor: Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.

Awarding Agency: General Services Administration

Start Date: 2026-03-26

End Date: 2027-03-31

Contract Duration: 370 days

Daily Burn Rate: $1.7K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 16

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE

Sector: Other

Official Description: MOAKLEY HARDENING FULL DESIGN

Place of Performance

Location: BOSTON, SUFFOLK County, MASSACHUSETTS, 02210

State: Massachusetts Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

General Services Administration obligated $627,838.77 to JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC. for work described as: MOAKLEY HARDENING FULL DESIGN Key points: 1. Contract awarded via full and open competition, suggesting a competitive bidding process. 2. The contract is a firm-fixed-price delivery order, providing cost certainty for the government. 3. Services are architectural, indicating a focus on design and planning for hardening efforts. 4. The contract duration is 370 days, aligning with typical project timelines for design phases. 5. The award is a delivery order against an existing contract, potentially indicating a streamlined procurement process. 6. The contract is not set aside for small businesses, suggesting large business participation.

Value Assessment

Rating: good

The contract value of $6.28 million for architectural services for hardening design appears reasonable given the scope. Benchmarking against similar large-scale architectural design contracts for federal facilities suggests this falls within expected cost ranges. The firm-fixed-price structure helps manage cost overruns, and the competitive award process further supports value for money.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that all responsible sources were permitted to submit a bid. The presence of 16 bidders suggests a robust level of interest and competition for this requirement. A high number of bidders generally leads to better price discovery and potentially lower costs for the government.

Taxpayer Impact: The extensive competition for this contract is beneficial for taxpayers as it likely drove down the final price and ensured the government received competitive proposals for the design services.

Public Impact

The primary beneficiaries are federal agencies housed within the Moakley building, which will receive enhanced security and resilience. The services delivered include architectural design for hardening measures, contributing to the physical security of a federal facility. The geographic impact is localized to the Moakley building in Massachusetts. Workforce implications include employment for architects, engineers, and design professionals within Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. and potentially its subcontractors.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for scope creep if hardening requirements are not clearly defined upfront.
Dependence on Jacobs Engineering Group Inc.'s expertise for successful design and implementation.
Risk of delays if unforeseen site conditions or regulatory hurdles arise during the design phase.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition with 16 bidders, indicating strong market interest and competitive pricing.
Firm-fixed-price contract type provides cost certainty and limits the government's exposure to cost overruns.
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. is an established firm with experience in federal contracts, suggesting a degree of reliability.
The contract is a delivery order against an existing contract, potentially indicating a mature and efficient procurement vehicle.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the Architectural Services sector (NAICS 541310), a segment of the broader professional, scientific, and technical services industry. The federal government is a significant consumer of these services for facility design, renovation, and security upgrades. Spending in this sector is often driven by infrastructure modernization, security enhancements, and new construction projects. Comparable spending benchmarks for similar federal facility hardening design projects would typically range from several hundred thousand to several million dollars, depending on the complexity and scale.

Small Business Impact

This contract was not set aside for small businesses, as indicated by the 'ss' field being false. This suggests that the requirement was likely too large or specialized for a small business set-aside, or that large businesses were deemed more capable of fulfilling the contract's needs. There is no explicit information on subcontracting plans for small businesses, but given the nature of the work, it is possible that Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. may engage small businesses for specialized design elements or support services.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract will likely be managed by the General Services Administration (GSA), specifically the Public Buildings Service, which is responsible for federal building management. Accountability measures are inherent in the firm-fixed-price contract type, which obligates the contractor to deliver the specified design within the agreed-upon price. Transparency is facilitated by the public award notice. Inspector General jurisdiction would apply in cases of fraud, waste, or abuse related to the contract.

Related Government Programs

Federal Building Security Upgrades
Architectural and Engineering Services
Infrastructure Modernization Programs
General Services Administration Capital Investments

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns if scope is not well-defined.
Dependence on contractor's technical expertise for effective design.
Schedule delays due to unforeseen site conditions or regulatory issues.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

General Services Administration awarded $627,838.77 to JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC.. MOAKLEY HARDENING FULL DESIGN

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is JACOBS ENGINEERING GROUP INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: General Services Administration (Public Buildings Service).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $627,838.77.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2026-03-26. End: 2027-03-31.

What is the track record of Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. with federal contracts, particularly in security design?

Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. has a substantial track record with federal contracts across various agencies, including the GSA. Their experience often encompasses large-scale design, engineering, and construction management for federal facilities. While specific details on their past security hardening design projects for federal buildings require deeper analysis of contract databases, their general profile suggests they possess the requisite expertise. A review of their past performance evaluations and any past performance questionnaires (PPQs) submitted during this procurement would provide more granular insights into their capabilities and reliability in delivering similar services.

How does the awarded price of $6.28 million compare to similar federal hardening design contracts?

Benchmarking the $6.28 million award requires comparing it to contracts for similar architectural and engineering services related to facility hardening for federal buildings of comparable size and complexity. Factors such as the specific hardening measures required (e.g., blast resistance, cybersecurity infrastructure integration, physical security enhancements), the size and type of the facility, and the geographic location can significantly influence costs. Without access to a detailed breakdown of the scope of work and the specific design requirements, a precise comparison is challenging. However, for a large federal building like the Moakley building, a multi-million dollar design contract for comprehensive hardening is not unusual, especially when awarded competitively.

What are the primary risks associated with this contract, and how are they mitigated?

Key risks include potential scope creep if hardening requirements are not precisely defined, leading to cost overruns or schedule delays. Another risk is the contractor's ability to deliver innovative and effective design solutions that meet evolving security threats. Mitigation strategies include the firm-fixed-price contract type, which incentivizes the contractor to manage costs effectively. Clear contract language, detailed performance work statements, and regular progress reviews by the GSA are crucial for managing scope and ensuring quality. The competitive award process also mitigates risk by selecting a contractor with a demonstrated track record and competitive pricing.

What is the expected effectiveness of the hardening design services to be provided?

The effectiveness of the hardening design services will depend on the thoroughness of the architectural assessment, the integration of current threat intelligence, and the implementation of robust security principles. The GSA's selection of Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. through a competitive process suggests confidence in their ability to provide effective designs. The final design's effectiveness will be realized during the subsequent construction phase and its ability to withstand potential threats. The contract's success hinges on the design meeting specified performance criteria and security standards outlined in the solicitation.

How has federal spending on facility hardening and related architectural services trended in recent years?

Federal spending on facility hardening and related architectural services has generally trended upwards in recent years, driven by increased security concerns, aging infrastructure, and evolving threat landscapes. Agencies across the government, including those managed by GSA, have allocated significant resources to upgrade physical security, enhance resilience against natural disasters, and protect critical infrastructure. This trend is reflected in the consistent demand for architectural and engineering services focused on security design and retrofitting of federal buildings. Budgetary allocations for such projects often fluctuate based on national security priorities and infrastructure investment cycles.

What is the significance of this contract being a delivery order against an existing contract?

A delivery order against an existing contract, often established through a Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) or a similar indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle, signifies a streamlined procurement process. Instead of conducting a full, new procurement, the agency utilizes a pre-competed contract vehicle. This approach can significantly reduce acquisition lead times and administrative burden. For taxpayers, it can mean faster deployment of necessary services and potentially lower overall acquisition costs due to the pre-negotiated terms and conditions of the underlying contract.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services › Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services › Architectural Services

Product/Service Code: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER SERVICES › ARCH-ENG SVCS - GENERAL

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: SUBJECT TO MULTIPLE AWARD FAIR OPPORTUNITY

Offers Received: 16

Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 1100 N GLEBE RD STE 500, ARLINGTON, VA, 22201

Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $627,839

Exercised Options: $627,839

Current Obligation: $627,839

Contract Characteristics

Multi-Year Contract: Yes

Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS/SERVICES PROCEDURES NOT USED

Cost or Pricing Data: YES

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: 47PF0023D0006

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline